Merrill Lynch employed Post and Maney as account executives. Both men elected to be paid a salary and to participate in the firm’s pension and profit-sharing plans rather than take a straight commission
| ♥ 0 |
Merrill Lynch employed Post and Maney as account executives. Both men elected to be paid a salary and to participate in the firm’s pension and profit-sharing plans rather than take a straight commission. Thirteen years later, Merrill Lynch terminated the employment of both Post and Maney. Both men began working for a competitor of Merrill Lynch. Merrill Lynch then informed them that all of their rights in the company-funded pension plan had been forfeited pursuant to a provision of the plan that permitted forfeiture in the event an employee directly or indirectly competed with the firm. Is Merrill Lynch correct in its assertion? Why or why not? |
Explanation
Individual P and Individual M should be given the benefits that they have earned during their employment with Individual ML. When Individual ML has taken away the jobs of both Individual P and Individual M, both individuals have the freedom to be employed at any firm of their choosing.
Verified Answer
Individual ML should give the benefits to Individual P and Individual M since they have been terminated by Individual ML and Individual ML has no right to take away the benefits of both the individuals.
